EvaUnit02 on 8/1/2009 at 09:28
Never mind Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm is fucking awesome.
Your sense of humour absolutely fails if you don't get that show; same can be said about The Office UK and Extras.
Thirith on 8/1/2009 at 10:10
Though I wouldn't call them "filth", I find people who take unqualified personal taste for absolute truth overrated. In fact, even if these people are not rated at all, they're still overrated.
snauty on 8/1/2009 at 13:23
Quote Posted by DaBeast
Were they the ones who blamed a shitty performance at Live Aid on Phill Collins?
They didn't blame it on him. They blamed it on themselves for taking it too lightly, thinking they'll do well enough with no rehearsing and bringing Phil in for 3 songs.
They were stellar at their December '07 full set reunion as they were in the 70ties. Labelling them "classic rock" and calling them atrocious or overrated smells like knowing only Stairway to Heaven and basically nothing about music history. Ts, listen to Zep records, the sounds, the arrangements, the grooves, all blueprints for later and mostly worse bands who never got it. They cast their ickyness back to the original, who obviously get the blames by the not-so-informed. Truly bad overrated stuff goes by the names of Aerosmith, Dream Theater, late Queen and whatnot.
And The Beatles are overrated, too, yeah sure. Though I would say that Sgt Pepper is, but only compared to their other, finer albums like Revolver, Abbey Road and that white one.
So...
And if mentioned already, no you're wrong too: Nirvana cannot be rated high enough either.
Kuuso on 8/1/2009 at 13:47
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Well if we're going to trash classic rock, let's trash people who actually suck like the Rolling Stones.
Also the Beatles. Overrated.
I don't really like any of these earlier rock bands, but at least with The Beatles, I can see their material and how many different places it goes and experiments and how it affected the music that was yet to come. The Rolling Stones - meh.
Quote Posted by Random_Taffer
Sometimes it's true, but I'd say mostly with the vocals and only occasionally. (In Zeppelin's case)
Their earlier live stuff was nearly flawless, but if you don't like their music to begin with, then I can't help you there.
Also. It seems to me like the majority of live modern rock songs that I've heard are piss poor compared to the live quality of the old days. There are, of course, always exceptions to this.
I don't like rock that much altogether, since it's a so stale as a genre. Funny enough, I think Robert Plant is the most exciting aspect of Led Zep, since his voice is quite unique.
Quote Posted by Thief13x
Good call, it's so much better to listen to Ashlee Simpson lip-sync
or jazz, which mostly surpasses everything in and out of mainstream popular music in pure musicianship ;)
Quote Posted by fett
Yeah. Not to mention that they influenced pretty much every single rock band you've ever listened to. Fucking perpetrators!
No one can bag on the Beatles until you've listened to Revolver with headphones on. HEADPHONES do you hear me?
Influence or not, I can still think they're not that good (live). Influnce =/= good
Quote Posted by snauty
They were stellar at their December '07 full set reunion as they were in the 70ties. Labelling them "classic rock" and calling them atrocious or overrated smells like knowing only Stairway to Heaven and basically nothing about music history. Ts, listen to Zep records, the sounds, the arrangements, the grooves, all blueprints for later and mostly worse bands who never got it. They cast their ickyness back to the original, who obviously get the blames by the not-so-informed. Truly bad overrated stuff goes by the names of Aerosmith, Dream Theater, late Queen and whatnot.
Thanks for making nice assumptions about me. I have more beef with their live stuff than their albums, although I think their songs are often dragging on for wayyyyy to long and dull (the riffs I can appreciate, Kashmir, Heartbreaker et al). The most beef I have is their live performances. Led Zeppelin was not that talented band, Especially Jimmy, who's only talent seemed to be trying to play the guitar faster than he was physically possible. It's annoying when people hype them up because of their live stuff.
I think they're far better than crap like Aerosmith. Queen has pretty much most filler songs than any other band I've heard.
Quote:
And if mentioned already, no you're wrong too: Nirvana cannot be rated high enough either.
Well, the Seattle scene saved us from Hair Metal, which puts them next to Gandhi and Martin Luther King for me.
ps: I do enjoy Deep Purple tremendously, I've seen them twice too. Then again, they did have Jon Lord.
driver on 8/1/2009 at 15:30
Quote Posted by Aja
Seinfeld is a wonderful show -- I find it hard to believe those who hate it have actually watched it for any length of time. It's too self-deprecating to deserve a place in this thread.
Methinks you're misunderstanding the basic premise of this thread.
Ghostly Apparition on 8/1/2009 at 15:37
Quote Posted by Tocky
And come on people, with all the crap on TV you pick Family Guy to hate on? REALITY SHOWS are the equivalent of frontal lobotomy and everyone should chase the idiots on them down and beat them on principle.
I have to agree with this. Reality shows are total crap, but the reason there's so many of them is because they are cheap to make, in comparison to a quality drama show say. That's no reason to subject people to them though. End result
is that's all thats on anymore, plus I would question the intelligence of anyone who watches that crap.
Also on the overrated list for me is Will Ferrell. I've never seen anything he's been in that I thought was funny and I can't for the life of me figure out why
he even has a career. He's not a good actor and he's a lousy comedian.
In short he stinks. Period.
also overrated and I'm tired of hearing about them, Britney Spears, Jessica or ashley Simpson, Paris Hilton etc.. I DON"T CARE WHAT THEIR LATEST FUCKUP IS. Its not news you dolts.
june gloom on 8/1/2009 at 15:38
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Never mind Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm is fucking awesome.
Your sense of humour absolutely fails if you don't get that show; same can be said about The Office UK and Extras.
I have never watched it. I don't watch much TV.
Thirith on 8/1/2009 at 15:39
Concerning Will Ferrell: I don't like him as a comedian, but I thought he did a very good job in Stranger Than Fiction - a film that I didn't particularly like, but I thought Ferrell was good in it. Not as good as, say, Jim Carrey in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, mind you.
snauty on 8/1/2009 at 18:23
Quote Posted by Kuuso
Thanks for making nice assumptions about me. I have more beef with their live stuff than their albums, although I think their songs are often dragging on for wayyyyy to long and dull (the riffs I can appreciate, Kashmir, Heartbreaker et al). The most beef I have is their live performances. Led Zeppelin was not that talented band, Especially Jimmy, who's only talent seemed to be trying to play the guitar faster than he was physically possible. It's annoying when people hype them up because of their live stuff.
That was my first impression too. And their mostly odd meters. But there's also their acoustic side, especially on albums III, IV and Houses of the Holy, where he plays with undisputed grace. I respect Page mostly for his studio work. In this field he's way up there with anyone as an arranger and producer. Furthermore he (and multinstrumentalist Mr. Jones, who is the most influential Zep member for me as a musician) worked as arrangers and players on about half of all 60ties british recordings, being hardly 20 years old. So much for talent and overrating.
But yes there was a sliiight tendency to extravaganza in their live shows. To me that's just a sign of the times. They pushed it, sometimes for brilliance, sometimes for falling flat. This wasn't tabooed yet, and that's basically a good thing. No rules please. If you think they're not a talented band, I can't but point to their albums and even to sheet music. There I really learned about them. No point discussing.
Quote:
Well, the Seattle scene saved us from Hair Metal, which puts them next to Gandhi and Martin Luther King for me.
Yeah I sure second that. :D
I adored Nirvana but didn't listen to too much miserable grunge. Soundgarden and that's about it. I turned more to the whacky and harder edged bands like Melvins, The Jesus Lizard, Sonic Youth, Rollins, Hüsker Dü, Dinosaur Jr, Helmet, Tar, Alice Donut and other stuff from SST, Alternative Tentacles and AmRep.
Quote:
ps: I do enjoy Deep Purple tremendously, I've seen them twice too. Then again, they did have Jon Lord.
I used to. Until I discovered Zeppelin when I was 15. I still respect them for their albums Fireball and Who Do We Think We Are, where they strayed from the rock ooomph stampede towards more sonic experimentations.
I find it weird to call Zeppelin untalented while enjoying Deep Purple. Especially their latter years with Coverdale & Hughes were drenched with self indulgent cock (or coke-) rock and individual posing.
Random_Taffer on 8/1/2009 at 18:33
Quote Posted by Kuuso
I have more beef with their live stuff than their albums, although I think their songs are often dragging on for wayyyyy to long and dull (the riffs I can appreciate, Kashmir, Heartbreaker et al).
I can respect that, but I find it odd that a lover of jazz would take so much issue with long instrumental freestyle sections. :confused:
